P.K.Jayarajan vs The Special Tahsildar (La) on 22 June, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA.No. 1031 of 2010()


1. P.K.JAYARAJAN,S/O.P.KUTTAPPA, PUDUSSERRY
                      ...  Petitioner
2. P.K.RAVINDRAN,S/O.P.KUTTAPPA,

                        Vs



1. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), GURUVAYOOR
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE,

3. THE COMMISSIONR OF LAND REVENUE,

4. GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, REPRESENTED BY

5. THE GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM EDUCATIONAL

                For Petitioner  :DR.K.P.KYLASANATHA PILLAY (SR.)

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.S.GOPINATHAN

 Dated :22/06/2010

 O R D E R
                     C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &
                              P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ.
                ....................................................................
                         Writ Appeal No.1031 of 2010
                ....................................................................
                  Dated this the 22nd day of June, 2010.

                                       JUDGMENT

Ramachandran Nair, J.

Heard Senior counsel appearing for the appellant and Standing

Counsel appearing for the Guruvayoor Devaswom. Challenge is

against acquisition of appellants’ land for the purpose of the school run

by the Guruvayoor Devaswom. This court has upheld acquisition

proceedings for the purpose of school and even in the SLP filed and

pending before the Supreme Court, Supreme Court has not stayed any

proceedings pursuant to acquisition. Even though counsel for the

appellants submitted that Devaswom should provide alternate land for

rehabilitation, we do not think we can make it a condition for allowing

Devaswom to take over the land acquired because acquisition for the

purpose of school is obviously a public purpose which cannot be even

delayed. The learned Single Judge has also given freedom to the

appellants to approach the Land Acquisition Officer for reasonable

time for shifting their house, temple etc., which they are free to pursue.

2

A reasonable time can be granted to the appellants for vacating the

residential and temple premises, provided remaining land is given

possession for the purpose of development without any further delay.

Subject to the above observation Writ Appeal is dismissed.

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Judge

P.S.GOPINATHAN
Judge

pms